Interesting that you were more than willing to suggest something which is explicitly banned.
It is always nice when you come across someone who obviously has experience and is willing to share it rather than a smart arse who *thinks* he knows it all.
(As for your need to criticise my use of English - I was really impressed by that failed attempt)
You may f*ck off now - but do read what Andy Wade has said - you may find it useful sometime if you seek employment as an amateur sparks somewhere.
Not sure why you are determined to throw toys out of the pram over this, however lets do it again for the last time...
You asked:
"Any suggesti "No idea without looking."
However since you asked me to speculate, I added:
"The easy way would be to tie a knot in the flex."
Since this is commonly done in practice. I was not advocating it however. I would not do it myself, but its an easy way to do it, and lots of people do it - even professionals who should know better.
I went on to say:
"A *better* way would be to put a cable tie tightly round it. Alternatives would be a P clip under one of the fixing screws etc. "
(my emphasis)
These were ways I was advocating, hence why I promoted them as "better". In another post I also pointed out that the more usual solution when taking a flex into a surface mounted box would be simply to clip it to the surface outside of the box, and then there is no need for restraint inside the box.
Thank you. Glad you appreciate it.
When answering technical questions - especially any where terminology may be important, I find it helpful to be clear. Sometimes that requires addressing errors in the question. Don't take this as a personal slur on your reputation as a cunning linguist.
I always read what Andy has to say, he has an encyclopaedic knowledge of a wide range of topics, and is particularly strong on electrical matters. He is a highly respected poster in uk.d-i-y and other groups.
I have no idea what your posting history is, or what reputation you have created for yourself, however I am beginning to get some idea.
Erm that does not really make sense does it? I think you will find that employment would imply being paid to do a job, and hence make one a professional not an amateur.
I am sure you would like the last word, so go on, knock yourself out ;-)
Didn't have to be 'rich' to buy a council house using the RTB scheme - the early buyers (those before the YUPPIES started paying silly prices) bought their home for and average of around £5000.
Remember, it was the idiotic nouveau riche that force house prices to stupid heights - along with subsequent slumps leaving may in negative equity.
We can't be sure, but it looks like it passes diagonally behind the cooker.
It could actually be powering the cooker, though that seems unlikely.
Or (this seems most likely to me) it could connect to the socket visible to the left of the cooker at the bottom. You can't tell for sure because if it did come to that at the expected angle, it would be hidden behind the bike wheel.
Could I ask, if you are currently an electrician 'qualified' to IEE 17th Edition standard - or greater?
Could I also ask, your motives for questioning the legality of the wiring in the photograph that you supplied the link to?
Could I also ask, if you took the photograph, if you did, did you have the owners permission to photograph inside and/or the property?
Could I ask if, you didn't take the photograph, have you obtained the copyright owner's permission to reproduce it?
The [truthful] answers to those questions could be required to ascertain as to whether you have a genuine query as to the safety of the occupants of the property - or simply being vexatious for your own reasons.
It is clearly the KD3C11 halogen version. The gas one does not have the "hot surface" indicator light amongst the knobs, whereas the one in the original picture does.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.